Saturday, January 25, 2014

Between Serbia and Syria

With the putschists in Kiev (and in the west of Ukraine) getting more violent, the government is getting wobbly. Surely they know that trying to appease the Empire by tolerating an armed rebellion is akin to letting the sharks have just a little bit of blood?

I still think the escalation of "protests" is a sign of desperation. They've been out in the streets for two months, accomplishing nothing. So they - or their sponsors, more likely - decided to kick it up a notch. Remember, this is "Game of Thrones" thinking at work: you either win (i.e. get power) or you die (politically rather than actually, though if things get out of hand....).

So far, what's been going on in Ukraine is still following the Serbian scenario, as I told RT last night. But unless the protests are dealt with in a firm, yet careful manner, it is entirely possible the next step might be an escalation to something like Libya or Syria: an "Arab Spring popular revolution" that spun off into outright civil war.

I don't think most Ukrainians, even the fanatical Banderists in the west, actually desire an armed confrontation. Play-acting a revolution following a Western script, at the expense of American taxpayers and with Victoria Nuland feeding you cookies is one thing. Getting shot is quite another.

Klitschko, Yasenyuk and Tyahnybok are either playing with forces they don't understand, or don't care how many people get hurt in the process of them seizing power (and then, predictably, proceeding to fight each other). They obviously care not a whit for law - otherwise they wouldn't be breaking it so blatantly - or democracy, otherwise they'd have waited for the 2016 elections. Some "representatives of Ukrainian people" indeed. Unless John McCain gets to define what it means to be Ukrainian these days.

As a footnote, I suppose commenting on events in Ukraine for two months now may technically make me an "Ukrainian affairs analyst", though please note that designation was of RT's choosing, not mine. I run an Institute for Serbian studies; can't help it if Serbian issues are eerily similar to those unfolding in Kiev right now - and for a good reason, because the same power is behind both.

They are being hypocritical, and not just about that. Because nationalism - pride in one's own nation - is a powerful form of group identification, political players always seek to manipulate it. In Empire-assembled "opposition" coalitions, you always have multiple disparate elements - chauvinists, transnationalists, opportunists - so that they can present themselves as truly representative of the people. If and when they come into power, the infighting begins and the coalition crumbles. At that point, the only thing that matters to the Empire is who serves it most effectively.

Look at Serbia: the "hardline ultranationalists" - as the Western media painted them for nearly two decades - ended up being the most sniveling servants of the US and EU.

Ukraine is a religiously divided country, one half has a hatred for the other half that identifies itself with the Russian Orthodox side.

The nationalists are the opponents of the Russian Orthodox, if you can call them nationalist, they are more like neo-nazis. The neo-nazis get outside support from people like John McCain: http://imgur.com/a/1ghhi/

Neo-Nazis are classified as potential terrorists, in Europe and the US by intelligence agencies. Like muslim radicals, neo-nazis are increasingly internationalized. I am afraid if this thing in Ukraine blows up, they will get outside support from neo-nazis around the world (including NATO).